 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
o ←→ o̞
editIn the examples, is the use of [o], rather than [o̞], intentional? Isn't one of the aims of this article to point out the distinction between the two? Using the same symbol for both is, in my opinion, counter-productive to that end. Dan ☺ 15:59, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, that makes sense. — Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi] 00:06, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Mid back rounded vowel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131211020607/http://www.kent.ac.uk/secl/ell/staff/amalia-arvaniti/docs/Greek%20Phonetics%20-%20The%20State%20of%20the%20Art.pdf to http://www.kent.ac.uk/secl/ell/staff/amalia-arvaniti/docs/Greek%20Phonetics%20-%20The%20State%20of%20the%20Art.pdf
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.taalportaal.org/taalportaal/topic/pid/topic-14610909940908011
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:14, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
The amount of rounding
editIs there any research on whether [o̞] typically has more rounding than the cardinal [ɔ]? When I listen to Greek, Japanese or Spanish, their /o/ seems to differ from my Polish /ɔ/ by the amount of rounding it has ([o̞] is more rounded), rather than the exact tongue position which is only slightly higher. I know that Polish /ɔ/ is only weakly rounded, but so is cardinal [ɔ] (it's only slightly more rounded). It'd be fascinating to see a similar study regarding [ø̞] vs. [œ]. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 16:49, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
@Kbb2: which Serbo-Croatian dictionary uses namely U+00F4 for it? Moreover, may a serious source use U+00F4 ô LATIN SMALL LETTER O WITH CIRCUMFLEX in a Cyrillic text? Please, don’t defend random Wikipedian trash. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 12:08, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Incnis Mrsi: HJP and Rečnik srpskohrvatskoga književnog jezika just to name two. The latter is written in entirely (or almost entirely) in Cyrillic. Also, check Wiktionary. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 12:16, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Kbb2: where is specifically U+00F4 which you defend against me? Don’t evade the question. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 12:20, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Incnis Mrsi: Obvious typo is obvious, so let's not split hairs. The error has been fixed. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 12:24, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Kbb2: where is specifically U+00F4 which you defend against me? Don’t evade the question. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 12:20, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
Notation
editDon't Sinologists use ꭥ rather than o̧? BodhiHarp (talk) 18:10, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
- Not according to https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2024/24147-sinological-ext-ipa.pdf, which clearly says o̧ is used by Sinologists. I tried to find any connection to ꭥ being used by Sinologists, and the only "source" I could gather was this edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sinological_phonetic_notation&diff=prev&oldid=1051673247, seemingly just to "fill in the gap". It looks to have been used there because the others are derivative from Americanist phonetic notation#Bloch & Trager. Oklopfer (talk) 19:05, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
- I followed the Unicode request's source back as well to confirm - L2/24-147 points to "Jamin Pelkey (2011) Dialectology as Dialectic: Interpreting Phula Variation. De Gruyter Mouton." On page 66, where the image is pulled from: https://www.google.com/books/edition/Dialectology_as_Dialectic/AMUHAqCwuG8C?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA66&printsec=frontcover
- Which then references Sun and Jiang (2004). The title in Mandarin is "描写中国语言使用的国际音标及附加符号" and the given English translation is "On IPA and supplementary phonetic symbols used in (studying) the languages of China". If you would like to look it up yourself, there is a PDF available from a forum under the Mandarin name, but I do not know the licensing on it, so I won't upload it to Wikimedia. The bottom of page 49 includes a table and page 50 includes both a vowel trapezium and a description stating [o̧] as the vowel between [o] and [ɔ].
- However, in the 2006 The Universal Phonetic Symbol Set in China (http://www.moe.gov.cn/jyb_sjzl/ziliao/A19/200602/W020220517310669055657.pdf), while the function of it is never mentioned in the text, ⟨ꭥ⟩ is at least referenced in the table on page 18 (#674), where there is just a / in its description box; and in the table on page 27 (#320-322), clearly derived from Bloch & Trager's symbols given the single and double dot diacritics. Page 24 of that document describes the additional vowels ⟨ᴀ ᴇ ɿ ʅ ʮ ʯ⟩, but neither of the additional back vowels ⟨o̧ ω⟩ that Sun and Jiang describe. Oklopfer (talk) 20:09, 24 August 2025 (UTC)